Front End Analysis

Client

The Forest Glen* Community Association Board of Directors

Background Information
The Forest Glen Community Association Board of Directors is the governing body for a community association representing 99 homeowners in a waterfront community in Anne Arundel County, Maryland. For more background on the duties of this board, see the Performance Gap Analysis.

In recent months, homeowners have been approaching the board president and recording secretary, complaining of a bottleneck at the board level. They are concerned that key items brought to the board by EPCOM are taking too long to receive board attention.

Interview findings included concern that the board has delayed action on a new set of by-laws, first introduced in the summer of 2010; that meetings take too long because of “socializing,”; and that the board president does not get the agenda out until a few days before the meeting. Some members of the board express satisfaction with the way meetings are run; others seek a more formal approach.

This body is facing a big test, as it is considering a one-time assessment (fee) on property owners. Having lost members who cannot tolerate the time board meetings take, the board must assess its way of doing business.

Methods

Performance Gap: To determine my problem statement, I reviewed the last year’s minutes and agenda for the board, which meets monthly. I interviewed three property owners, including one former member of the Environmental Protection Committee, who reported dissatisfaction with the board. I also interviewed the board president, who is in his second year of office. I reviewed community covenants, the community website, and minutes of the EPCOM board. Additional research took place before the Root Cause Analysis.

Problem Statement

The Forest Glen Community Association Board of Directors has a practice of deferring key action items at monthly board meetings, hindering its ability to uphold community standards and protect property values in the neighborhood.

Current State	Future State	Delta
The board acts on 50 percent of its agenda action items and defers the remainder for a future meeting.	In Fiscal Year 2012, the board will act on 90 percent of agenda items.	40 percent

Root Cause Analysis

Methods:  More interviews took place, this time with board members including the board president, past president, and treasurer. (Click here for more information on this research phase.)

Physical Resources	Structure/Process	Information
The board meets at each other’shomes. It does not use a meeting room available to the community.The board’sbylaws allow for up to 7 members plus a management company representative (9 in total). There are currently 5 members, a management company representative and a recording secretary. (7 members). An additional seven members serve on the Environmental Protection Committee (EPCOM) a subcommittee of the board.	Forest Glen meetings are loosely structured. Board members mix dinner with board business, and interruptions are many. While the board meeting may start at 7, actual business is not conducted for about 20 minutes while members get food and drinks. The board president does not limit the time on discussions.The board meets monthly, but does not keep to a regular meeting schedule.	The flow of information to the board and from the board to the public is sporadic.The president delivers the agenda to the board the day before, and sometimes the day of the meeting.There is very little communication of board action to the community. Important messages are posted on the mailboxes or sent through periodic mailings. The website is not regularly updated. Minutes of the board meetings are not widely shared with the community.
Knowledge/Skills	Motives	Wellness
In terms of deficient skills, the board president and recording secretary do not exhibit knowledge in assembling a workable agenda, running a meeting or managing the time in the board meetings.In terms of knowledge, the board members as a whole do not have knowledge of running a meeting.	There is no compensation for board service. Board members are motivated by a desire to protect the welfare of the community. The board includes many long-time homeowners who have lived in the community for 25 years or more. In addition to providing service to their community, they want to protect their property values and quality of life as well.	The time commitment required by this volunteer board often creates stress for its members. Dealing with complaints from angry homeowners (sometimes next-door neighbors) who are concerned about their property values, or angered by board decisions on covenant violations or change orders, is also stressful.

 

Finding: PHYSICAL RESOURCES

The board meets at members home, mixing social aspects of the meetings with business, and making meetings too long for members with demanding work and family obligations. Time spent socializing takes away from the board agenda.

Recommendation

Consider one of two meeting place alternatives: 1) public library branch one-half mile away (free meeting room until 9 p.m.) or 2) rent space at the community theater meeting room adjacent to the community, which is already used for community meetings twice a year.

Finding: STRUCTURE/PROCESS

Board meeting are loosely run. Time limits are not set for agenda items. There is no scheduled time for meetings to end.

Recommendation
The Forest Glen board needs to take time to analyze its approach to running meetings. It is recommended that the board schedule a retreat that would allow the board to consider the various communication styles of its members, its process of running meetings, and alternate structures for running meetings, such as strict adherence to Robert’s Rules of Order.

Finding: INFORMATION

Board members often do not get the agenda ahead of time. The president sets all agenda items shortly before the meeting based on notes from the previous meeting and e-mails from various members in the time between meetings. The board does not always act on items because it does not have all the information available in order to vote decisively.

Recommendation

Using Google docs or a blog, have all board members add to and approve the final agenda one week before each meeting. Ensure that the board members have the previous month’s agenda at least one week before the meeting, for prompt approval at each meeting. If information is incomplete, request the EPCOM (Environmental Protection Committee Chair) provide additional information on the blog or Google doc. This preparation will save information sharing time at the meetings, allowing members to prioritize items and vote on them during the scheduled meeting.

Finding: KNOWLEDGE

Board members are not aware of the amount of time wasted on their meetings. The board has not taken time to assess its own performance or examine how it runs a meeting. Board members with various experience all have various ideas of how a meeting is best run, based on their professional experiences. Thus, while the initial finding was that board members did not know how to run a meeting, the revised finding is that board members all have differing notions of how a meeting should be run.

Recommendation

Schedule a board retreat to discuss the board’s process and identify knowledge gaps and training needs. The board needs time to discuss its current approach to handling community business and assess it against their desired goal to improve productivity.

Findings: MOTIVES

Board members are motivated by a desire to serve the community. As unpaid volunteers, they act to protect the quality of life in the community and do not expect rewards or acknowledgement.

Recommendation

Do not remove the social aspects of board meeting, e.g., snacks and drinks, or coffee and desserts, as the camaraderie of board meetings are important for its members. Instead, implement a clear separation of social/business aspects of the meeting. For example, schedule coffee and desserts for conclusion of the meeting, or schedule meetings earlier and adjourn for dinner at a community restaurant.

Finding: WELLNESS

Board members report feeling stress over pressure from the community to solve problems; board members are stressed by anger over board decisions including the enforcement of community covenants. As volunteers, most with full-time jobs, the board has a heavy committment. The board president results it is hard to recruit new members because of the time commitment involved.

Recommendation

By making its decisionmaking process more public, the board can engender community support by showing it is acting in the best interest of the community. While the association has a website, it is not frequently updated. The board can release a short synopsis of board business after each meeting (working with the management company to turn minutes into a short summary). The board can host more social gatherings (such as a summer barbecue) to encourage neighborhood unity.

By increasing its membership from five to seven (which the bylaws allow), the board can spread the workload and rotate responsibilities, such as creating the agenda, networking with EPCOM members, and updating the webpage. However, the board will not be able to recruit new members unless it addresses the issue of lengthy, unproductive board meetings.

CONCLUSION

It should be noted that in historical perspective, the board avoids the conflicts and factions of previous years’ boards. However, with a major issue such as an assessment looming, the board needs to make prompt action on key items a priority in order to inspire community trust.

The recommended next step is that the board set aside a meeting to specifically address the gaps in knowledge and the changes in structure/process that can promote faster action on key issues. A training needs assessment should be conducted to determined if board members could apply training to more efficient decision making, thus increasing the percentage of action items voted on in one meeting from 50 to 90 percent.

* “Forest Glen” is a pseudonym.